MATERIALS AND METHODS: Self-administered questionnaires were distributed to 400 subjects. The questionnaire comprised three parts; the first part addressed the demographic variables. The second part queried about dental prosthesis, orthognathic or plastic surgery, and/or ongoing or previous orthodontic treatment. The third part included the Arabic version of the-8-item Orofacial Esthetic Scale (OES-Ar) whose responses were scored in the 5-point Likert scale. These scores were compared by different grouping factors (age, gender, marital status, and education) using non-parametric Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal Willis tests with 95% confidence interval (α > 0.05).
RESULTS: A total of 268 questionnaires were eligible for analysis, representing 67% response rate. The satisfaction with facial profile appearance was the highest (4.0±1.1) followed by facial appearance (3.9±1.1), while the color of teeth was the least satisfying item (3.1±1.3). No significant differences were found between age groups for the mean summary score as well as for each item independently. No significant difference was found between both sexes except for the last item "overall impression". Married subjects rated one item (alignment of teeth) better than their counterparts. Positive perception of orofacial appearance increased significantly with the increase of education level, the perception of the oral health status, and the perception of the general health status.
CONCLUSION: Good oral health and/or high education level are significant determinants of more positive perception of orofacial esthetic appearance. Patients with these characteristics might be more concerned about their orofacial appearance, and this should be taken into consideration before planning any esthetic restorative dental treatment.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this bibliometric study was to analyze the characteristics of the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry between 1970 and 2019.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Web of Science Core Collection was used to retrieve 9 categories of the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, including keywords and terms used, cited documents published, the countries and organizations of the authors, references, and sources cited during this period. Data were exported to a software program and analyzed for each 10-year period and for the entire 50 years. The highest 10 in each category were reported. Co-occurrence, couthorships, and linkage were also reported.
RESULTS: A total of 11 989 records were reached by the search on the Web of Science Core Collection database; of which, 10 638 (92.9%) were included in the analysis. Articles made up 91.1%, of all records, with 217 review documents (1.8%). The most productive decade was 1980 to 1989 with 2936 documents. The total number of citations of all documents (available period 1980 to 2019) including self-citations was 155 112. During the period 1970 to 2019, 14 837 terms were used. The total number of keywords was 4933 (available period 1990 to 2019). There were 15 382 authors, 82 countries, and 2113 organizations identified in articles published in the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry during this period, with most from the United States. There were 43 027 authors, 95 324 references, and 14 594 sources cited in the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry during the period surveyed.
CONCLUSIONS: This bibliometric analysis provided a comprehensive overview of the impactful role of the Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry in contemporary dentistry, particularly in the field of prosthodontics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample comprised 2,200 dentists from 21 countries. Three scales - Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS), Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS), and Affect Balance Scale (ABS) - were used to measure the subjective responses. Data related to demographic and social characteristics were recorded. Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used as appropriate. Scales were correlated, and multiple linear regression analyses were employed to identify the independent determinants of SHS, SWLS and ABS. Data were analysed using the SPSS software program; a value of P <0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS: The overall mean scores of SHS, SWLS and ABS were 18.53 ± 5.06, 23.06 ± 6.25 and 1.26 ± 2.40, respectively, with significant differences found across countries: dentists working in Croatia, Peru and Serbia recorded the highest scores, unlike dentists practicing in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq, who recorded the lowest scores. There were significant, moderately positive correlations between the various scales: SHS and SWLS: r = 0.535, P